Is there ANY mechanism to remove a Supreme Court Justice?

[Ravenseye]

For instance. Let say there is an opening in the Supreme Court. The President nominates someone with a scant and short public record. The Senate during confirmation hearings asks him a question and he lies about it.

Now, the Senate, say, isn't aware that it's a lie and they confirm him. Can anything happen to them to remove them from the court afterwards if all their testemony was a lie?

Can they just lie and lie and lie during hearings and get appointed and then...say "HA I lied to all of you. I can't believe you bought it!"

What if a Supreme Court justice hypothetically sold national secrets to our enemies. Could they be removed from the bench? If they can be removed for a treasonous crime can they be removed for perjury?

[Freddie Stubbs]

1. They can be impeached by the House

and removed by the Senate, just like any federal judge.

[ThomWV]

2. At What Level Has It Happened

I seem to remember that a very few Federal Judges have been removed from the bench, but VERY is the key word here.

[Freddie Stubbs]

11. Usually corruption

http://air.fjc.gov/history/topics/topics_ji_bdy.html

[Spider Jerusalem]

3. The same procedure as removal of a President...

bill of impeachment in the House of Representatives, and trial by the Senate.

Article II, Section 4 of the US Constitution:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

[BOHICA06]

4. Federal Court Judges & Justices

..including the Supremes may be impeached. A. Hastings from South Florida stood trial in the Senate back in the 80s - now he is a Congressman. Dosen't happen very often and greatly depends on the poltical colors of the Justice versus who is controlling the Senate & House.

[Spider Jerusalem]

5. How is it that he's a Congressman?

Seems to be a violation of the Constitution; impeachment is supposed to be disqualification for "any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States". (And I don't care that he's a Democrat, either...he shouldn't be there.)

[dmr]

10. Doesn't sound right, but he can run for Congress

so long as a person is 25 years or older, a citizen for 7 or more years, and lives in the state in which he wishes to represent.

For a Senator, it's 30 years or older, a citizen for 9 or more years, and lives in the state in which he wishes to represent.

It's in the Constitution, Article 1, Section 2 and 3, respectively.

The Constitution doesn't disqualify or exclude anyone accused of, convicted or jailed for crimes, or even paroled from running for public office, including the president, so long as they meet the other qualifiers.

I remember the Hastings impeachment. Alcee was impeached as a Federal Judge for bribery. Nice, eh?

I agree, I don't care which party you belong to, you don't belong there, but people still voted him into office. Go figure :shrug:

Edit: spelling!

[yvr girl]

6. Don't the confirmation hearing deal largely in opinion?

I think the fact of a candidate's record are pretty well known. They are giving their reasons for previous decisions. They are also asked their opinions on various issues.

People are allowed to change their minds - it is not against the law, it is not perjury.

I would assume that if a Justice was convicted of a crime, he/she would be removed from the bench.

[Ravenseye]

7. What about

if they were to ask him if he was a member of the Federalist society and he says 'no, I don't recall ever belonging to that organization.' and then they find evidence that he was, and still is a member. Wouldn't that be perjury?

[Spider Jerusalem]

8. If he's lying in sworn testimony before a Congressional committee...

then yes, that's perjury.

[KharmaTrain]

9. Do We Want To Play That Game?

No, I don't support Roberts and I'm hoping his Federalist Society connections and that entire elitist cabal becomes the focus of his "confirmation"...and who knows what the political climate will be this fall. If the Rove noise continues to dominate (and I expect it will), along with indictment (or the forthcoming indictments), it's going to complicate this procedure.

I would imagine the standards for impeaching or removing a SCOTUS justice would be similar to the Appelate or other high federal court and has a very high bar of criminality before it can be invoked. It's a political process...not a criminal one, so a Repugnican majority can keep a judge on the bench up until they're sentenced (and some claim beyond...privilidge of the judiciary).

If you want to see the procedure, here's a good rundown:

http://www.constitutionproject.org/ci/newsroom_guide/29.htm

Despite the frequency with which members of the political branches suggest that federal judges have engaged in impeachable conduct, however, use of impeachment itself is relatively rare. Since 1789, impeachment proceedings have been initiated against 12 judges. Nine other judges resigned before such proceedings were formally instituted. Eleven of the 12 impeachment cases went to trial; four resulted in acquittals and seven in actual removals. One resigned during the proceedings. The most recent cases of impeachment and removal occurred in 1989, when Judges Alcee Hastings and Walter Nixon were impeached for financial misdealings and corruption. (Hastings later went on to win election to Congress from Florida.) A list of judges who were impeached, with brief summaries of the charges and results, are described below:


Now...about impeachment, how would you react if Repugnicans start getting "buyers remorse" on a Souter and want to toss him off the bench. How would your feelings be then?

Let's beat them on their records and lies...plenty of those around now and playing it smart. There's plenty on Roberts coming to light that will require him to be accountable for his past and his politics.